Talk:Stopping Power
Untitled Would just like to add that the UMP with a silencer does not reduce its damage, just the dropoff on range. 05:55, December 16, 2009 (UTC) Requesting Page lock against further Vandalism I've now counted at least 4+ times, where an Anon IP user, has edited in "This perk seems to be the most Overused" Despite REPEATED warnings that Opinion edits are not allowed. I suggest we lock this page from further edits by Anon IPs.--Razgriez 18:34, December 26, 2009 (UTC) : : I've met quite a few people who find it annoying, because you basically have to use stopping power to counteract other people with stopping power (and give up another tier 2 perk). Maybe the article should mention that.Apepa 04:16, January 28, 2010 (UTC) 100%+ damage? (MW2) If you are using an Assault rifle, say the AK47 or the TAR-21 both with FMJ on, is it worth having Stopping Power? The description says the perk gives 40% extra damage, and from memory Id say the damage of the two mentioned weapons are at 80ish%. Does that mean the rifle will do a total of 120% damage? Or is it capped off at 100% :It simply raises the weapon damage by 40%. It's as simple as that. 19:39, January 13, 2010 (UTC) If Stopping Power increases bullet damage by 40% and Juggernaut reduces it by 25% (Yes, that's what it says in the article.), how do they cancel out? Should't Stopping Power win? Explaination please! 23:14, September 17, 2011 (UTC) ::Similar to Pack-a-Punched Dragunov in Zombies doing normally about 3,500 damage when headshot, it does way more when the target is George. In a nutshell, they're made to negate each other on purpose. 23:34, September 17, 2011 (UTC) ::stopping power is a 1.4 multiplier for weapon damage, and juggernaut is a 0.75 damage multiplier. 1.4*0.75=1.05, which is very close to the original damage, which would be 1.00, close enough to cancel out most notable benefits. 01:47, September 16, 2012 (UTC) ::Nope, the code does not increase damage at all when using Stopping Power against someone using Juggernaut. 04:32, September 16, 2012 (UTC) Is stopping power really less effective on lower damage/higher rate of fire weapons? The article suggests this is true but if we take a weapon that does D damage with stopping power on it does 1.4D Damage. No if we take another weapon that does half the damage but fires twice as fast we get (D/2)*1.4+(D/2)*1.4=1.4D This is regardless of whether I hit all my bullets with higher RoF weapons since this concept also applies without stopping power on, if you follow? You are using the wrong measurement. Time to Kill is the key here. In terms of MW2, ROF is more important than damage. Damage mattered in WaW and CoD4 because guns that did less than 30 damage were helped a TINY bit more by Double Tap and guns that did more than 30 damage were helped a TINY bit more by Stopping Power (purely in terms of Time to Kill). Anywho, a gun with a low ROF is going to benefit more from shaving that one extra bullet off with Stopping Power. Imrlybord7 14:53, January 24, 2010 (UTC) :If that's the case, can the last trivia part be removed, it is rather confuesing and vauge, seeing as how it says the oppisite of what the top does. 21:40, January 24, 2010 (UTC) Stopping power pro Anyone have any idea how much the pro adds to the anti-vehicular damage? It would be interesting to see, if nothing else. StranaMechty 15:59, February 17, 2010 (UTC) ﻿ hat Doesn't Effect? I am confused. How could you tell when it doesn't have any effect on weapons if you put it with stopping power TheEnigma13 20:00 April 20,2010 It has an effect on all weapons with the exception of the WA2000. It does not with launchers, instead of SP Danger Close works with explosives ''Talk'' |'' [[User blog:Ukimies|''Blog]] 13:01, April 20, 2010 (UTC). It's not that it doesn't affect the WA2000, it's that it doesn't benefit it. It's all in the math. A person has 100 health in core game modes, and the WA2000 does 70 damage. Additionally, it has a 1.5 damage multiplier for head, neck and chest. This means that when you shoot someone in these three places, the bullet does 70 x 1.5 = 105 damage. The target is already dead, so stopping power is unnecessary. For the torso and limbs, the damage multiplier is 1.0, so the bullet deals 70 damage. Taking stopping power into account, 70 x 1.4 = 98. Target is still alive and requires a second shot. This means that unless one is using a silencer, the WA2000 does not benefit from stopping power (barring some very rare cases), and you're best off using another perk. He is right about explosives though. 13:06, April 20, 2010 (UTC) ^Yeah that's what I meant with the WA2000. I'm just too lazy to write all that. ''Talk'' |'' [[User blog:Ukimies|''Blog]] 13:07, April 20, 2010 (UTC) Also, a FAL without a Holographic sight and the .44 Magnum do not benefit from Stopping Power either Samiam22 00:39, September 12, 2010 (UTC) Actually they do. With Stopping Power, a FAL without Holographic Sight will get a larger 2-shot kill range and the ability to pull of 1-hit-headshot-kills at close range. The same goes for the .44 Magnum, which will also with Stopping Power) kill with 3 shots and medium and long range as compared to 4 without Stopping Power. They don't benefit as much as most other weapons, though. Skulldragon GC 16:10, October 1, 2010 (UTC) Forget what I said about the .44 Magnum above, I thought it's base damage was 30. Skulldragon GC 21:22, November 14, 2010 (UTC) The last paragraph... ... of the MW2 section is super biased. Although I agree, it is almost completely based on opinion. Should we do something about it? SSDGFCTCT9 (Talk) 16:38, September 19, 2010 (UTC) :Bias, opinion and the impersonal "you" are not allowed. The whole paragraph has been removed. LITE992 18:22, September 19, 2010 (UTC) I demand to know who wrote this and what he was smoking "Possibly the most efficient use for Stopping Power would be with a weapon with a high rate of fire or high accuracy ratio, such as the P90 or Mini-Uzi, but is also very useful for "obsolete" weapons like the M14 (which becomes inferior with the introduction of the Dragunov by a damage improvement)." As we all know (or should know), stopping power on SMGs and ARs have the effect of reducing shots needed to kill by one. Hence, it is the MOST useful on slow firing weapons and the LEAST useful on rapidly-firing weapons. Second point, the Dragunov does not make the M14 obsolete. The Dragunov is a sniper. The M14 is an assault rifle. Saying the Dragunov makes the M14 obsolete is like saying the telephone makes the motorbike obsolete. Imagine getting caught in close combat with an M14. Now imagine getting caught in close combat with a dragunov. Which situation would you prefer? 17:46, April 5, 2011 (UTC) Snipped. Thanks for the report.--WouldYouKindly 17:48, April 5, 2011 (UTC)